Notices
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Einstein & Tesla involved in The Philadelphia Experiment

  1. #1 Albert Einstein was involved in the Philadelphia Experiment 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    56
    "In 1943, the U.S. Navy conducted a series of tests to render allied ships invisible to enemy radar. The results of these tests have never been made public. The final test, which resulted in the project's termination, has come to be known as The Philadelphia Experiment" - intro to movie

    Has anyone seen the 1984 film The Philadelphia Experiment? Does anyone have the DVD? If so, have you read the liner notes?...

    "As with most modern legends, details are as vague and conflicting as they are plentiful. What is concretely known about the Philadelphia Experiment can be reduced to a few sentences. A United States Battleship named the USS Eldridge was brought into Delaware Bay near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in July of 1943. The US Navy has perennially stated that the purpose of the Eldridge's stay was to conduct 'degaussing' experiments which they hoped would give the ship a virtual invisibility to underwater mines. 'Degaussing' is the term used to describe the neutralization of magnetic fields. By covering the battleship in the magnetic fields as a proximity alert and therefore as the trigger for detonation. Now this explanation is not far-fetched. Quite the contrary. World War II was in full swing in 1943, and the Navy would have both ample excuse and the resources to conduct an experiment of this nature. The experiment originally titled 'Project: Rainbow' utilized basic scientific principles to help give the Navy a decided advantage in their efforts for peace.

    Of course that was not the end of the story. It is after this basic setup that the accounts of the 'experiment' become increasingly extraordinary. Although no government officials have ever admitted to this, it is generally believed that at some point during the tests on the Eldridge, an electrical current was sent through the fields of wire covering the ship. Some modern day scientists have put forth the idea that not only did the Navy wish to conceal the ship from mines, but from conventional radar as well perhaps even normal vision. By sending the current through the wire, it is conceivable to create a masking effect by bending light around the ship as to cause it to appear invisible. Again, that was, and remains to this day, a theory. However the story does not end there.

    Those who accept the electrical charge portion of the story are also prone to suggest the final section of the legend as truth that 'The Philadelphia Experiment' caused the USS Eldridge to displace from time, sending it from Delaware Bay to Norfolk, Virginia almost simultaneously. There are some semi-confirmed reports of crew-members from a ship docked in Norfolk seeing the Eldridge for about 15 minutes before vanishing from view. The ship vanished and partially vanished from Delaware Bay several more times during the day as the experiment supposedly progressed. There were reports of Eldridge crew members reappearing time and again, some seeming disoriented and suffering from a malaise of unknown origins. On another of the ship's disappearances and re-appearances, some members of the crew were reported to have come back fused with parts of the ship! Other wild aspects of the story go on to account for ex-crew-members suffering long-term mental illness, and even disappearing from time altogether...

    There are even some who claimed Albert Einstein was present on the day of the experiment. Maybe he was. At this point, anything is possible."
    - Michael Felsher

    Has anyone read Secrets of the Unified Field by Joseph P. Farrell (Adventures Unlimited Press, 2008)? I recommend it. Possibly the most important fact disclosed in that book is not that Einstein's 1928 unified field theory was engineered in 1944 by the US Navy with his active participation in the project. According74* to the book, Einstein also sought a very simple74 equation that affected all of human culture. Like his unfinished unified field theory, Einstein died before discovering the simple 'theory of everything'.

    I've discovered both unified string (u21s19) theory and plan-it theory of GOD=7_4 or FOD=6_4.

    *exposed gematria74

    - Brad Watson, Miami, FL
    author of There Are No Coincidences - there is synchronism
    "In GOD=7_4, FOD=6_4, And Science We Trust"


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    My apologies Brad. I mistook you for a misguided, yet enthusiastic amateur. It is now apparent that you are simply a kook. The pathology of your woo-woo character appears quite interesting so I look forward to picking it apart in future interchanges. I just wanted to set that out here, but from this point forward I shall be treating all of your posts as if you were a serious scientist.

    Just for the record, can you confirm that you think there actually was an experiment? If so do you believe the claim that Einstein was involved with it? What do you think was the result of the experiment?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Re: Albert Einstein was involved in the Philadelphia Experim 
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    I've discovered both unified string (u21s19) theory and plan-it theory of GOD=7_4 or FOD=6_4.

    *exposed gematria74
    This thread is not about your theory. If you're going to start peddling your theory in other threads, I am going to start deleting your posts.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    My apologies Brad.
    Ophiolite,

    I perceive your "apologies" as being insincere and I've noted your insults. Is this how you approach everyone with a different view than yours?

    Everyone,

    I left a very clear reference to the book: Secrets of the Unified Field - I recommend reading it. If you choose to ignore it and other books on the subject and then take a stance that anyone who has read the books and learned the information presented is a "kook", well...

    Imagine that on August 5 1945 you somehow heard that the United States was working on a secret weapon that unleashes the power of atomic fusion and that one bomb could destroy an entire city. Your reaction might be, "That's crazy and you're a kook! Provide some real evidence." Well, the next day provided quite the evidence.

    - Brad Watson, Miami, FL
    In God & Science We Trust
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    My apologies Brad.
    Ophiolite,
    I perceive your "apologies" as being insincere and I've noted your insults. Is this how you approach everyone with a different view than yours?
    Brad,
    I was not apologising. On the contrary I was trying to make clear that I consider you to be a deluded nutter. You have mistaken this for an insult when it was merely an observation. You should be becoming aware by now that any one with any credibility on this forum has come to the same conclusion regarding you.

    However, I am offering you a helping hand. I am prepared to pretend that you are a serious scientist with a viable hypothesis. If this is in fact true, as you appear to believe, then this will be demonstrated by your responses within the discussion we hold together.

    For this discussion to get under way I need you to answer my earlier questions. I've expanded them here in order to explain to you why I am asking each one.

    Just for the record, can you confirm that you think there actually was an experiment? If you don't think the experiment was actually conducted, or at least an attempt made to conduct it then there is probably no point proceeding further.

    If so do you believe the claim that Einstein was involved with it? This seemed to be an important point in your post, but I wasn't sure if your were mentioning it out of passing interest, or if it were a central element in your argument.


    What do you think was the result of the experiment? This is very important. If you think the result was inconclusive, or quite negative then it suggests you are interested in the principle of the experiment and would like, for example, to see it repeated to try to get more informative data. If you think the results were along the lines of what urban legend would have us believe then I am interested in what evidence leads you to believe this given the amount of contrary evidence in existence.

    I trust you will take the time to respond to this in a positive manner so we may intitiate, then move forward with the discussion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    56
    Ophiolite,

    I, again, note your insults and I repeat, Is this how you approach everyone with a different view than yours? Twice now, you have started a reply to me by insulting me several times and claiming to speak for everyone on this forum. Then, you act like I should just answer your questions as if you've shown me some kind of respect, while making it clear, that if my reponse - in any way - differs from your opinion, that it is to be considered riduculous! Do you realize that you are attempting to bully me?!

    Everyone,

    My initial post on this thread was well researched and took some time to present. It included very good sources. Have some respect for that even if you disagree with the material presented. The op should have a chance to respond to a different view, doesn't everyone agree?

    - Brad Watson, Miami, FL
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: Albert Einstein was involved in Philadelphia Experiment 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    I've discovered both unified string (u21s19) theory and plan-it theory of GOD=7_4 or FOD=6_4.
    This thread is not about your theory. If you're going to start peddling your theory in other threads, I am going to start deleting your posts. - The Biologista
    The Biologista,

    I recognize that you are the moderator. The position you hold has great responsibility. I'm sure you don't take it lightly - I do not.

    I was trying to provide a good reply to the op and since I referred to Einstein's search for a unified field theory, I felt it appropriate to mention that I have found it. Was I "peddling my theory" by mentioning it? I certain wasn't selling anything - I'm not offering anything for sale - and isn't that the dictionary definition of 'peddling'? Are you hereby informing me that I have been 'officially warned' and if I mention one of my theories again on a thread I didn't start - the post will be deleted?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Ophiolite,

    I, again, note your insults and I repeat, Is this how you approach everyone with a different view than yours?
    Not at all. It is how I approach people who show every sign of being one sandwich short of a picnic. When different views are presented in a logical manner, supported by evidence, then I give those views proper consideration. In some instances I am persuaded of their correctness, or at least their plausibility. In other instances I remain unconvinced. Thus far I have seen nothing in your posts that constitutes meaningful evidence, nor much sign of a logical argument.
    Twice now, you have started a reply to me by insulting me several times
    Well, at least we can agree on that. Did you have a point, or were you just recapping events to date.

    and claiming to speak for everyone on this forum.
    That is wholly incorrect. Nowhere have I claimed to speak for everyone on this forum. Please read what I have actually written, not what you think I have written. (No apology is necessary. I understand that mistakes happen.)

    Then, you act like I should just answer your questions as if you've shown me some kind of respect
    It's entirely up to you if you wish to answer my questions or not. However, you may wish to consider this:
    1) They are serious, relevant questions.
    2) If you give thoughtful answers I shall respond to them in a serious, considered manner.
    3) No one else seems prepared to engage you in a serious discussion about your ideas. I am prepared to do so.

    I haven't shown you any respect, so it would be ridiculous for me to expect you to answer my questions because I had done so.

    while making it clear, that if my reponse - in any way - differs from your opinion, that it is to be considered riduculous!
    Where have I made this clear. For the third of fourth time I intend to treat all your responses that form part of the on-topic discussion with proper seriousness, wether or not I agree with them. Why you think statements to that effect actualy mean the opposite, I don't know.

    Do you realize that you are attempting to bully me?!
    I have no interest in bullying you. I am interested in beginning this discussion. I am being honest in declaring what I think of you personally, but did we come here to discuss you or your ideas. I'd prefer to focus on the latter, so can we please get on with it. My questions from my last post stand. I look forward to your replies.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9 Re: Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    You should be becoming aware by now that any one with any credibility on this forum has come to the same conclusion regarding you.
    Ophiolite,

    Weren't you erroneously speaking for everybody? I consider everybody on this forum to have credibility. Listen, enough of this silly duel. You've made it clear that you have no respect for me and yet want to engage me in a dialogue. No thanks. I see no reason to reply to anyone who doesn't show proper respect. I will do my best to ignore you.

    Everyone,

    Let's get back on topic which is The Philadelphia Experiment. Was/is it a 'black project' of the US Govt? Does the US Govt have any 'black projects'? Well, ya. They've been keeping the military space plane (X-38?) secret until they launched it from Cape Canaveral last week and had to expose it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10 Re: Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    You should be becoming aware by now that any one with any credibility on this forum has come to the same conclusion regarding you.
    Ophiolite,
    Weren't you erroneously speaking for everybody?
    No I was pointing out that those with credibility would already have formed a negative opinion of you. Not everyone on this forum has credibility. You are new here and may not be aware of that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Listen, enough of this silly duel. .
    I have been asking you for the last several post to drop the personal issues and address the topic in hand. You keep running away from a set of perfectly reasonable questions. In the meantime no one else seems interested in engaging in discussion with you. I am prepared to. What are you afraid of?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    You've made it clear that you have no respect for me and yet want to engage me in a dialogue.
    I'm giving you an opportunity to discuss a subject that appears to be of interest to you. I am willing and ready to discuss that subject in a dispassionate, balanced, objective manner. Why the **** does it matter what my opinion is of you? Are you telling me you value my opinion? Surely it is the topic that is important.
    I mean, did you want me to pretend I thought you were the greatest intellect since Einstein? Would that have been honest? I suggest that would have been considerably more disrespectful. But it is entirely up to you.

    By the way, I just spent an hour trying to summarise my approach to planet modelling, on the relevant thread, in response to your request. I suppose that will now go unread by you. Pity.

    Just a small clarification:
    They've been keeping the military space plane (X-38?) secret until they launched it from Cape Canaveral last week and had to expose it.
    I believe you are referring to the X-37B launched on an Atlas-5 last week. Since there has been a wikipedia article on this project since September 16th 2004 I am not exactly clear in what way the US government was keeping the project secret. Could you comment on this?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11 Re: Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Let's get back on topic which is The Philadelphia Experiment. Was/is it a 'black project' of the US Govt? Does the US Govt have any 'black projects'? Well, ya. They've been keeping the military space plane (X-38?) secret until they launched it from Cape Canaveral last week and had to expose it.
    It would be a non sequitur of greatest proportions to suggest that because the military guards its technology from falling into the hands of potential enemies that it therefore is capable of violating the laws of physics and common sense by making a battleship disappear then reappear somewhere else.

    Only the most daft among us would consider such an argument to have any validity.

    But at least I'm confirmed in my decision to move one of your threads to the trash recently. I've a feeling it'll not be the last. Please bear in mind that this is a science board and, while we have a "pseudoscience" subforum, its main purpose isn't to be a dumping ground or magnet for those that wish to claim crackpot speculations and claims to be true. This forum is more suited for discussing the nature of pseudoscience, exposing pseudoscience and engaging in discourse about the psychological motivations of those who buy into pseudoscientific claims in the manner you appear to.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12 Re: Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    (The military) is (not) capable of violating the laws of physics and common sense by making a battleship disappear then reappear somewhere else. Only the most daft among us would consider such an argument to have any validity...crackpot speculations
    SkinWalker (an unusual screen name),

    I see that you're in charge of this forum. I don't want to seem disrespectful to you and your position, and at the same time, you show great disrespect to me. Did I ever say, "The military is capable of violating the laws of physics"? No. Have I ever said in any other posts that anyone is capable of violating the laws of physics? No. Did the atomic bomb defy the laws of physics? No, but up until Aug 6 1945, how many would have believed that such a thing was possible? It appeared to surprise the hell out of the Japanese!

    You've made it clear that you have no problem calling someone "(lacking) common sense", "the most daft", "crackpot". Do you have a problem with others calling you that on this forum? If not, how much further can it go? Extreme insults? Cursing? Unfortunately, you (and others) have shifted the focus away from the exploration of science. Now the topic is 'character' and 'honor'. What kind of character do I have? What kind of character do you have? You are apparently very supportive of showing a lack of respect to others. If someone and something doesn't appear to fit in with your views, then it is Ok to bully that person. I strongly disagree with you! Let me provide an example of an encounter that might shed some light on this question of character, respect, and honor...

    A year ago in Pasadena, CA I attended the NASA Conference Missions for Exoplanets: 2010-2020. I assume you and most everyone on this forum is familiar with NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). At the beginning of the conference I met Wesly Traub - the Director of NASA Exoplanet Exploration. He'd already read my paper/poster and after politely greeting me and welcoming me to the conference said, "You realize that many here will have strong problems with your presentation" (or something close to that). He implied that he has strong problems with my theories and perhaps data, but didn't say it directly. I talked to him (and many others) at the 3-day conference. No one was rude. Certainly, no one was insulting. However, several expressed their negative view of my 'very new' theories. Several others were confused at first reading, and several others were very impressed. Another example...

    A couple years back I emailed Neil deGrasse Tyson a summary of my Identifying 'True Earth-like Planets' - All New Worlds Are Built On 7_4 (like Earth) or 6_4 paper. His reply was, "Very interesting. Time will tell whether you are right". That simple response seemed to sum up my predictions very well.

    Now I recognize that personal meetings and emails with 'public people' have a social norm to them. NASA is a public agency and there are 'politics' constantly involved and Tyson is somewhat of a science celebrity. This Internet forum - all Internet forums - have an appearance of being public and observing the right of free speech, but that's very misleading. The forums are privately owned and operated, and the forum moderators (and members) have an agenda. The Internet also provides a new public interaction where the standards of decency and respect have been lowered. Apparently, the feeling of anonymity and undisclosed location provides people an opportunity to behave badly. (Note that I don't play that game. I use my real name and location in my posts.) thescienceforum.com is not as overt as say GodlikeProductions.com in its lack of decorum, but yet, you, other moderators, and members of this forum have established that what is considered to be unacceptable behavior in other social settings is permissible here. In other science forums, i.e. astronomy.com, disrespect and name-calling is not permitted. In my encounters with thescienceforum.com, I've been very disappointed in it for these reasons. And like in any organization, the problems stem from the top down and the 'top' is you. But respect and honor is in the eye of the beholder. Perhaps you and others here believe you have behaved respectfully and honorably here - I do not. And in doing so, you not only disrespect and dishonor yourselves, you disrespect and dishonor science. I try my best to respect and honor science, and to respect and honor all individuals.

    Bradford28,

    I apologize to you. What should have been a good thread on the information available on the Philadelphia Experiment should have developed into a pro-con respectful discussion of just that. It has turned into something altogether different and I apologize if I, and the information I presented with the best intentions, was the cause.

    - Bradshaw Watson
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13 Re: Proper respect of conflicting views 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Unfortunately, you (and others) have shifted the focus away from the exploration of science. ............Perhaps you and others here believe you have behaved respectfully and honorably here - I do not. And in doing so, you not only disrespect and dishonor yourselves, you disrespect and dishonor science. I try my best to respect and honor science, and to respect and honor all individuals.
    Then show that respect by doing these two things:
    1. Stop whining about how you have been cursed and insulted.
    2. Answer my ****ing objective, relevant, scientific focused questions about the topic of this thread. I have been trying to get you to do so for the last several posts, yet all you do is whine and run away. Do you seriously call such behaviour respectful? I tell you what. Don't answer that. I don't care about that answer. I want to discuss the Philadelphia experiment and your views on it. What do you want to do? Discuss, or whine?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14 Re: Albert Einstein was involved in Philadelphia Experiment 
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    I was trying to provide a good reply to the op and since I referred to Einstein's search for a unified field theory, I felt it appropriate to mention that I have found it.
    Why? This thread is about a very specific experiment that is alleged to have been conducted. It is about whether it happened and, if so, what it was about. Unless you were involved, it seems unlikely that it had anything to do with ideas you have aired decades later. This makes your post off-topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Was I "peddling my theory" by mentioning it? I certain wasn't selling anything - I'm not offering anything for sale - and isn't that the dictionary definition of 'peddling'?
    It is one of them. Another meaning is "to spread or cause to spread something", with negative connotations adopted from the original meaning, as peddlers where traditionally seen as pushy or untrustworthy. I hope that this clears up any confusion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Are you hereby informing me that I have been 'officially warned' and if I mention one of my theories again on a thread I didn't start - the post will be deleted?
    I am saying that it not fair to derail a topic, regardless of the manner in which that is done. I am saying it is worse to do so by introducing a topic one is trying to promote, when that topic is not relevant to the discussion at hand. It was a warning.

    You've since decided not to heed that warning, so consider this a more serious warning. You have a thread for your ideas already. There may be other threads where your ideas would be relevant. I have no issue with you posting your ideas in such places. Derail threads with your ideas, as you have now insisted on doing, and we will have to reassess whether your ideas are welcome at all. Clear enough for you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Brad; This is your thread, reacting to post being part of the duty of an author and properly located in a sub forum. However Ophie, is a very long time poster, respected by many and somewhat direct in his comments. In the years I've seen his post as a poster or moderator, I've noted many times where he can be convinced, if proven wrong in what his logic dictates to the issue. He may be trying to plant Science into the discussion, which of course couldn't be proved (think you know this) and in discounting that, could go nowhere for whatever reasons you have for posting this thread.

    'The Philadelphia Experiment' the movie, was released twice (1984-1993) as a Science Fiction presentation ( I saw both), taken from several books based on legends of an earlier day, WWII. Yes, Einstein was connected to Government experiments in those days, but keep in mind they were also building a Nuclear Weapon, based on his ideas and yes Einstein was a 'Theoretical Physicist', but proven correct on many of his theory.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    Brad; This is your thread, reacting to post being part of the duty of an author and properly located in a sub forum. However Ophie, is a very long time poster, respected by many and somewhat direct in his comments. In the years I've seen his post as a poster or moderator, I've noted many times where he can be convinced, if proven wrong in what his logic dictates to the issue. He may be trying to plant Science into the discussion, which of course couldn't be proved (think you know this) and in discounting that, could go nowhere for whatever reasons you have for posting this thread.

    'The Philadelphia Experiment' the movie, was released twice (1984-1993) as a Science Fiction presentation ( I saw both), taken from several books based on legends of an earlier day, WWII. Yes, Einstein was connected to Government experiments in those days, but keep in mind they were also building a Nuclear Weapon, based on his ideas and yes Einstein was a 'Theoretical Physicist', but proven correct on many of his theory.
    This is not Brad Watson's thread. It's bradford28's thread. Brad Watson is a troll who happened upon this thread.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17 Name-calling & Bullying 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    56
    Arcane_Mathematician,

    You resort to name-calling and bullying. Why not try contributing something to the thread and showing some respect to everyone?

    Moderators,

    Same thing to you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18 Einstein & Tesla involved in The Philadelphia Experiment 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    56
    (I had posted some of the following on the thread: The Philadelphia experiment by Bradford28. By doing so, I inadvertently created a serious off-topic problem. I'm trying to fix that by starting a new thread that although similiar, will uniquely deal with...

    Einstein & Tesla involved in The Philadelphia Experiment

    "In 1943, the U.S. Navy conducted a series of tests to render allied ships invisible to enemy radar. The results of these tests have never been made public. The final test, which resulted in the project's termination, has come to be known as The Philadelphia Experiment" - intro to movie

    Has anyone seen the 1984 film The Philadelphia Experiment? Does anyone have the DVD? If so, have you read the liner notes?...

    "As with most modern legends, details are as vague and conflicting as they are plentiful. What is concretely known about the Philadelphia Experiment can be reduced to a few sentences. A United States Battleship named the USS Eldridge was brought into Delaware Bay near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in July of 1943. The US Navy has perennially stated that the purpose of the Eldridge's stay was to conduct 'degaussing' experiments which they hoped would give the ship a virtual invisibility to underwater mines. 'Degaussing' is the term used to describe the neutralization of magnetic fields. By covering the battleship in the magnetic fields as a proximity alert and therefore as the trigger for detonation. Now this explanation is not far-fetched. Quite the contrary. World War II was in full swing in 1943, and the Navy would have both ample excuse and the resources to conduct an experiment of this nature. The experiment originally titled 'Project: Rainbow' utilized basic scientific principles to help give the Navy a decided advantage in their efforts for peace.

    Of course that was not the end of the story. It is after this basic setup that the accounts of the 'experiment' become increasingly extraordinary. Although no government officials have ever admitted to this, it is generally believed that at some point during the tests on the Eldridge, an electrical current was sent through the fields of wire covering the ship. Some modern day scientists have put forth the idea that not only did the Navy wish to conceal the ship from mines, but from conventional radar as well perhaps even normal vision. By sending the current through the wire, it is conceivable to create a masking effect by bending light around the ship as to cause it to appear invisible. Again, that was, and remains to this day, a theory. However the story does not end there.

    Those who accept the electrical charge portion of the story are also prone to suggest the final section of the legend as truth that 'The Philadelphia Experiment' caused the USS Eldridge to displace from time, sending it from Delaware Bay to Norfolk, Virginia almost simultaneously. There are some semi-confirmed reports of crew-members from a ship docked in Norfolk seeing the Eldridge for about 15 minutes before vanishing from view. The ship vanished and partially vanished from Delaware Bay several more times during the day as the experiment supposedly progressed. There were reports of Eldridge crew members reappearing time and again, some seeming disoriented and suffering from a malaise of unknown origins. On another of the ship's disappearances and re-appearances, some members of the crew were reported to have come back fused with parts of the ship! Other wild aspects of the story go on to account for ex-crew-members suffering long-term mental illness, and even disappearing from time altogether...

    There are even some who claimed Albert Einstein was present on the day of the experiment. Maybe he was. At this point, anything is possible."
    - Michael Felsher

    Has anyone read Secrets of the Unified Field by Joseph P. Farrell (Adventures Unlimited Press, 2008)? I recommend it. (I need to find my copy, it's been a couple years since I first read it.) I imagine that everyone on this forum is aware that although Einstein wrote a famous letter to Franklin Roosevelt in 1939 informing him and the US Federal Government of the possibilites of constructing a nuclear bomb and warning FDR about the possibilities of Hitler & NAZI Germany constructing it first, Einstein was never asked to work on the highly secretive Manhatten Project. Why not? Einstein was seen as a security risk by the highest Govt officials. But in the closed nuclear physics community of that era, Einstein knew (and communicated with) all the physicists involved - including Robert J. Oppenheimer - and knew what they were working on. Einstein was very good about keeping it secret. It's also public knowledge that Einstein was asked by Vannover Bush (did I get that name right?) to work on a secret Navy project in 1943. Einstein definitely worked on a Navy project during WWII - this is not disputed by anyone I've ever heard of. What is in dispute is whether Einstein was asked to work on the Philadelphia Experiment and whether his 1928 unified field theory was the basis of the project. Nikola Tesla had also worked on this project (he died January 7 1943). Also 'on board' was the leading electrical engineer of the day --- Kron(?). (I really need to find my copy of that book.)

    Possibly the most important fact disclosed in that book is not that Einstein's 1928 unified field theory was engineered in 1944 by the US Navy with his active participation in the project. According74* to the book, Einstein also sought a very simple74 equation that affected all of human culture. Like his unfinished unified field theory, Einstein died before discovering the simple 'theory of everything'.

    I've discovered both unified string (u21s19) theory and plan-it theory of GOD=7_4 or FOD=6_4.

    *exposed gematria74

    (---INCOMPLETE--- This will be finished74 later - I need to find that book when I get home)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    Brad Watson,

    Why don't you stop trolling other peoples threads just to push your inane nonsense on us? Make your own topics for that, and leave the threads of others alone.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20 Re: Name-calling & Bullying 
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Watson
    Arcane_Mathematician,

    You resort to name-calling and bullying. Why not try contributing something to the thread and showing some respect to everyone?

    Moderators,

    Same thing to you.
    Arcane is frustrated with your behaviour, as am I. He is certainly not bullying you and it is silly to suggest so. If you do not like the way I moderate this forum, then you can either make a complaint on Site Feedback, PM an Admin or just stop posting here. Whatever your choice, this thread is not the place for you soapbox on your favourite topic and certainly not the place to make a stand against my moderating. I will remove any further off-topic contributions that you make from this point, and if you persist with this ridiculous tantrum, I will move to have your account suspended.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    I have merged your posts from the other thread with this one. I sincerely hope that this forum is not going to end up filled with threads discussing various spins on your ideas. Carry on.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    However Ophie, is a very long time poster, respected by many and somewhat direct in his comments. In the years I've seen his post as a poster or moderator, I've noted many times where he can be convinced, if proven wrong in what his logic dictates to the issue.
    Jackson man, I love you. :wink:
    We disagree on much, but I think both of us have our hearts in the right place. If only they weren't such old hearts.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •